The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About6.m. Approval of the 2004 CDBG Applicationb CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: January 6, 2004 AGENDA ITEM:: Approval of the 2004 CDBG Application AGENDA SECTION: Consent , PREPARED BY: Kim Lindquist, Community Development Dir. AGENDA NO: , ATTACHMENTS: Application, Resolution APPROVED BY: Attached is a CDBG application for 2004. The application is due to CDA by January 31,2004. The application indicates that the city will allocate funds toward acquisition of land for the library site. This is the first time these funds have been allocated for this use. Public acquisition for a library is an eligible use of program funds. There is a question about use of funds due to the future ownership of the land for the library, if the property is . transferred to the County. The CDA staff is assisting the City in determining the program requirements if a land transfer occurs. If in the future it is found that these funds cannot be used for library acquisition due to the perimeters of the arrangement with the County, the city may modify the application for a different eligible use. At this time staff is requesting the Council approve the attached resolution approving the application and allowing submittal to the CDA. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to adopt a resolution approving the application for the City of Rosemount for fiscal year 2004 Dakota County Community Development Block Grant finding. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2004 - A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004 DAKOTA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDING WHEREAS, the City of Rosemount is a participant in the Community Block Grant Fund (CDBG) Program, WHEREAS, an application has been drafted proposing to spend the City's 2004 allocation for acquisition of land relating to the new Dakota County Library; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Rosemount hereby approves the application and authorizes the City Administrator to submit the attached application to Dakota County for the CDBG Program fiscal year 2004. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor and City Administrator are authorized to execute the application on behalf of the City of Rosemount. ADOPTED this 6 th day of January, 2004. William H. Droste, Mayor ATTEST: Linda J. Jentink, City Clerk CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of a resolution presented to and adopted by the City Council of Rosemount at a duly authorized meeting thereof, held on the March 20, 2003, as disclosed by the records of said City in my possession. (SEAL) Linda J. Jentink, Rosemount City Clerk Motion by: Second by: Voted in favor: Voted against: Member absent: APPLICATION FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS Application must be received by the Dakota County Community Development Agency NO LATER THAN JANUARY 31, 2004 Applicant Name: City of Rosemount CD District: 4 Contact Name: Kim Lindquist, Community Development Director Applicant Address: 2875 145 Street West City, State, Zip: Rosemount, MN 55068 -4997 Phone: 651 - 322 -2020 Fax: 651 - 423 -4424 Email: Kim .Lindquist @ci.rosemount.mn.us Title: Acquisition CDBG Request: $70,983 Title: CDBG Request: Title: CDBG Request: Title: CDBG Request: Title: CDBG Request: Total Request: I certify that the information contained in this application is true and correct and that it contains no misrepresentations, falsifications, intentional omissions, or concealment of material facts. I further certify that no contracts have been awarded, funds committed, or construction begun on the proposed project(s), and that none will be made prior to issuance of a Release of Funds Notice by the Program Administrator. Signature of Authorized Official Date Title of Authorized Official PLEASE ATTACH THE RESOLUTION OF THE GOVERNING BODY SHOWING APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST FOR CDBG FUNDS w Please complete the following pages for EACH project /activity being proposed. For example, if 3 projects /activities are being proposed, there will be 3 sets of the following pages. Describe the Project /Activity location (please attach a map of area): The city will be acquiring land for a Dakota County library to be built in 2007, opening 2008. The CDBG money would be allocated toward acquisition. There are three properties on the short list for acquisition. Two of the three properties designated will be located within a TIF Redevelopment District. The two locations are the Ratzloff Block and the other the St. Joseph's church property, specifically the playground area. Both are depicted in the map attached. Summarize the project/activity (please be brief, a more detailed description is requested later in the application): The City will be using their CDBG allocation to supplement the purchase of property for a new Dakota County Library. Has this Project/Activity received CDBG funding before? ❑ Yes ►1 0 Wel Check the activity for which the CDBG funds will be used: Z Acquisition /Disposition: Vacant or undeveloped property Commercial property Residential property X Public /Institutional (church) ❑ Demolition /Clearance ❑ Economic Development ❑ Rehabilitation Owner occupied housing Rental housing Commercial General Administration ❑ Code Enforcement ❑ Public Facilities /Improvements: Buildings Infrastructure Assessment abatement ❑ Public Services (i.e. child care, recreation programs) ❑ Planning ❑ Homeownership Assistance: Support services (i.e. pre or post purchase counseling) Downpayment assistance ❑ Relocation ❑ Other (please describe): Projects funded with CDBG must meet a National Objective. What National Objective will your proposed project meet? (Please see attachment for examples of National Objectives) ❑ Low /Mod Area Benefit ❑ Low /Mod Limited Clientele Benefit ❑ Low /Mod Housing Benefit ❑ Low /Mod Jobs Benefit ® Slum /Blight Area Benefit ❑ Slum /Blight Spot Benefit ❑ Urgent Need (extremely rare; used only for emergencies): E' If you checked the Low /Mod Area Benefit box; please answer the following: A. In what Census Tract(s) and Block Group(s) do beneficiaries of your Project/Activity live? (Please include maps) B. How many residents live in this area? C. What is the percentage of low and moderate- income beneficiaries? D. How was this documented? ❑ HUD Data ❑ Survey (See enclosed map) (Please include a copy of survey) I If you checked the Low /Mod Housing or Low /Mod Limited Clientele Benefit box, please answer the following: How many Low /Mod People or Households will benefit? (Please choose either people or households for each project.) How will income be verified? People /Households ❑ Income Verification Request Forms ❑ Eligibility Status for other Governmental Assistance program ❑ Self Certification (must inform beneficiary that all sources of income and assets must be included when calculating annual income) ❑ Presumed benefit (HUD presumes the following to be principally low and moderate - income: abused children, battered spouses, elderly persons, severely disabled persons, homeless persons, persons living with AIDS, migrant farm workers) * For projects that directly benefit people or households, race and ethnic data must be collected as well as number of female- headed households. If you checked the Slum /Blight Area or Slum /Blight Spot Benefit box, please answer the following: What are the boundaries of the slum /blight area (i.e. census tracts, intersecting streets) or the address of the slum /blight spot? The City will be creating a TIF Redevelopment District which generally encompasses the City's downtown area. The District will be created in the spring of 2004 and would contain two of the properties on the site selection list for the library. If Slum /Blight Area, what percent of buildings are deteriorated? To be determined. What deficiency will be corrected? inspector noting deficiency and /or include a photo) What will the public improvement be? (Please provide letter from city building In what year did the slum /blight designation occur? Will occur in 2004 If you checked the Low /Mod Jobs Benefit box, please answer the following: Will this project/activity create or retain FTEs? ❑ Create ❑ Retain For job(s) that are being retained, please provide evidence that the business being assisted has issued a notice to affected employees or that the business has made a public announcement to that effect, OR an analysis of relevant financial records that clearly shows the business is likely to have to cut back on employment in the near future without the planned intervention. Will the job(s) created or retained require a special skill? LJ Yes LJ No What percent of permanent FTEs will be held by or available to low /mod income persons? To meet the requirements of the "Jobs" National Objective, the business being assisted must enter into an agreement showing commitment that at lease 51 % of jobs created or retained will be available to low /mod income persons. The business must also be prepared to provide a list of all jobs, detailed information about the jobs being created or retained, the selection and hiring process, and demographic information about the employees. If you checked the Urgent Need Benefit box, please answer the following: Please describe the nature and degree of seriousness of the condition requiring assistance: What evidence is there that other financial resources were not available to alleviate the urgent need? When did the serious condition begin? r Source of Funds High Priority Needs — Housing High Priority Needs - Community Development Pending o F Renter, small related, 0 -50 /o of median income ® Parks /Recreation Facilities and other public ❑ ❑ Renter, large related, 0-50% of median income facilities not identified as medium or low priorities $70,983 o ❑ Renter, elderly, 0-50% of median income ❑ Street Improvements ❑ Public Services identified CDBG 2005 ❑ Renter, all other, 0 -30% of median income not as medium or low priorities Medium Priority Needs — Housing Medium Priority Needs — Community Development ❑ Renter, small related, 51 -80% of median income ❑ Non - Residential Historic Preservation ❑ Renter, all other, 31 -80% of median income ❑ Water /Sewer Improvements ❑ Owner, 0 -80% of median income ❑ Sidewalks ❑ Special Populations, 0 -80% of median income ❑ Storm Sewer Improvements ❑ Handicapped Services Low Priority Needs — Community Development ❑ Transportation Services Neighborhood, Health & Parking Facilities ❑ Substance Abuse Services Solid Waste Disposal ❑ Anti -Crime Programs Asbestos Removal Facilities ❑ Youth &/or Senior Centers Employment Training ❑ Youth &/or Senior Services Health Services ❑ Child Care Services Child Care Centers ❑ Other Youth &/or Senior Programs Micro- Enterprise Assistance ❑ Commercial /Industrial Building Rehab Economic Development Technical Assistance ❑ Commercial /Industrial Infrastructure ❑ Other Economic Development Activities ❑ Planning ** Needs identified as Low Priority in the Consolidated Plan should be funded with sources other than CDBG. i/Il Pro�ec# Budget Total Project Cost: $1,000,000 Total CDBG Funds: Est $70,983 est. $70,000 (2005) CDBG Percent of Total Cost: 7% (2004) total (2004 &2005) 16% Source of Funds Amount Committed Pending City Reserves $859,017 ❑ CDBG 2004 $70,983 ❑ CDBG 2005 $70,000 ❑ r Expenses (Please itemize *) Total Costs CDBG Funds Requested Acquisition $859,017 $140,983 Total: *two year request * Please itemize project expenses using the following as applicable to your Project: • Acquisition & Improvement Costs - Including purchase price, closing costs, site improvements, clearance of toxic contaminants, and other acquisition and improvement costs • Construction /Rehabilitation Costs - Including site improvements, construction (labor, materials, supplies), installation, permits and other construction /rehabilitation costs • Professional Fees and Personnel Costs - Including architectural, engineering and code inspection fees, surveys, appraisals, legal fees, hazardous materials surveys, project management, and other professional /personnel fees • Other Development Costs - Including relocation, financing costs, environmental reviews, environmental studies, and other development costs Eligible Costs for Planning Projects - Including professional services, project management costs, and other planning costs Estimated Project/Activity Schedule: Date for Award of Contract (cannot be before July 1, 2004): Proposed Start Date: Acquisition early 2005 Completion Date: Please describe the proposed project/activity. Please include in your description who or what will benefit from this project/activity: The proposed Dakota County Library facility will consist initially of 20,000 sq. ft. with a planned future expansion to 30,000 sq. ft. Approximately 3 acres are necessary for the library and will include 120 parking spaces. The library service area includes all of Rosemount, eastern Apple Valley, Southern Eagan and adjacent townships. It will relieve pressure on the nearest Dakota County Library facility located at the Western Service Center at Galaxie Avenue in Apple Valley. Please review each section for completeness. Each project should have separate Sections IV through VIII, Rosemount Potential Library Sites - 143 ST d � <� ❑ o S' i —� — 145TH - ST W– 0 a te a_, a_a , o I Min 46TH - STW , p fl o � >.ovvsKrnrtXS 0 0 oLa� FE - ai d (Da DID I o o "�� ♦ O , a --� - 150TH - ST W (CDtR; Y ROAD42) -- Potential Library Sites Study Area Boundary Study Parcels f Railroad 0 Water Road Centerline ® Park Buildings 0 0.25 Man - I CITY OF ROSEMOUNT CITY HALL 2875 — 145th Street West Rosemount, MN 55068 -4997 Phone: 651. 423 -4411 Hearing Impaired 651 - 423 -6219 Fax: 651- 423 -5203 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILED AND POSTED HEARING NOTICE FOR Appeal of a Decision of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments To Approve a VARIANCE for a Fence Height STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF DAKOTA )ss. CITY OF ROSEMOUNT ) Linda Jentink, being first duly sworn, deposes and says: I am a United States Citizen and the duly qualified Clerk of the City of Rosemount, Minnesota. On December 17, 2003, acting on behalf of the said City, I posted at the City Hall, 2875 145th Street West, and on December 18, 2003 deposited in the United States Post Office of Rosemount, Minnesota, copies of the attached notice of public hearing regarding the appeal of a decision of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments to approve a variance for a fence height for Stephen Sipe, 14292 Crofton Court in Rosemount, enclosed in sealed envelopes, with postage thereon fully prepaid, addressed to the persons listed on the attached listings at the addresses listed with their names. There is delivery service by United States Mail between the place of mailing and the places so addressed. Linda Jentink, y Clerk City of Rosemount Dakota County, Minnesota Subscribed and sworn to before me this 1 - day of December, 2003. CITY OF ROSEMOU NT Public Notice CITY HALL 2875 — 145th Street West Rosemount, MN 55068-4997 Phone: 651 - 423 -44 11 Hearing Impaired 651 -423 -6219 Fax: 651 - 423 -5203 Stephen Sipe 14292 Crofton Court Appeal of a- decision of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments To Approve a VARIANCE for a Fence Height TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: NOTICE Is H EREBY GIVEN, the City Council of the City of Rosemount will hold a Public Hearing to consider the item listed below on Tuesday, January 6, 2004, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, 2875 145th Street.West, in Rosemount, Minnesota, beginning at 7:30 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible. The Public Hearing pertains to 14292 Crofton Court in Rosemount, Minnesota. The purpose of the public hearing is to receive public comment on the appeal of a fence height variance to allow the construction of a 6' fence approved by the Board of Appeals and Adjustments on December 9, 2003. Persons wishing to speak on this issue are invited to attend and be heard at this scheduled public hearing. Formal written comments will also be accepted prior to the meeting dates. Please forward all written comments and/or inquiries to the Planning Department of the City of Rosemount or call (651) 322 -2051. Dated this 17th day of December, 2003. Linda J. Jentink,�eity bVk City of Rosemount Dakota County, Minnesota Auxiliary aids and services are available - Please contact the City Clerk at 651 -322 -2003 or 651- 322 -6219 (TDD number) to make a request. Examples of auxiliary aids or services may include: sign language interpreter, assistive listening kit, accessible meeting location, etc. CARL E & MARY M ARNDT 14254 CRANBERRY WAY ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -3388 RONALDIBUDD 14262 CRANBERRY WAY ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -3388 PATRICK A & PEGGY A WARNER 14248 CRANBERRY WAY ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -3388 ANTHONY J FORYSTEK 14280 CROFTON CT ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -7118 JAMES N & KRISLYN A SCHELLBERG 3933 143RD ST W ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -4061 SCOTT W & SHELLIE M WILSON 14268 CROFTON CT ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -7118 PETER M & MICHAELINE KAY RICK A & SHELLY R BROTEN 14240 CRANBERRY WAY 14286 CRANBERRY WAY ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -3388 ROSEMOUNT MN 55068-3388 BRENT R & MONICA J EICHTEN MICHAEL A & LISA A GLAUS 14232 CRANBERRY WAY 3911 143RD ST. ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -3388 ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -4061 WAYNE C & GAYLE M NICKSON 14293 CROFTON CT ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -7118 GORDON L & PAULA A PH -LIPS 3874143RD ST ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -4060 JOHN D GRUNDMAN 3858 143RD ST ROSEMOUNT MN 5506814060 STEVEN P WILSON 3840 143RD ST W ROSEMOUNT MN - 55068 -4060 GAYLE A JENSEN 3892 143RD ST ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -4060 STANLEY P & PATRICIA JURUSIK DAVID C & REANN M COSSALTER MICHAEL T & KATHLEEN BAKER 14224 CRANBERRY WAY 14269 CROFTON CT 3908 143RD ST ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -3388 ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -7118 ROSEMOUNT MN 55068-4060 RONALD D HAYES JEFFREY P & DIANE J FORTHUN STEPHEN G & DEBRA L WARWEG 14270 CRANBERRY WAY '14294 CRANBERRY WAY 3926 143RD ST W ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -3388 ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -3388 ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -4060 RICHARD & PATRICIA GRATHEN DARRYL R & EVA M WICK RANDY L &BRENDA D KRUGER 14216 CRANBERRY WAY 14281 CROFTON CT 3944143RD ST W ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -3388 ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -7118 ROSEMOUNT MN 55068.4060 RUDOLF H & DIANA SCHAEFER STEPHEN A & ROXANE R SIPE 14208 CRANBERRY WAY 14292 CROFTON CT ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -3388 ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -7118 RICHARD A & REBECCA REESE RONALD & LAURIE BOYD 14278 CRANBERRY WAY 3997143RD ST W ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -3388 ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -4061 JEFFREY D & SANDRA J GARBRECHT 14345 CORMORANT WAY ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -7113 SLAVA & OLGA GEKHT 14341 CORMORANT WAY ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -7113 MARK W & PAULA J REBER 14351 CORMORANT WAY ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -7113 DAVID A & CARMEN P JOHNSON 3962 143RD ST W ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -4060 CYNTHIA J KOHLS 3996143RD ST W ROSEMOUNT MN 55068-4060 DANIEL P & KATHRYN A MCGINN 3978 143RD ST W ROSEMOUNT MN 55068-4060 DAVID G & ANGELA H MRACEK 14355 CORMORANT WAY ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -7113 GARY S & JANET L LEEAN 14361 COMORANT WAY ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -7113 The Rosemount Town Pages AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION Chad Richardson, being duly sworn, on oath says that he is an authorized agent and employee of the publisher of the newspaper, known as The Rosemount Town Pages, and has full knowledge of the facts which are stated below: (A) The newspaper has complied with all of the requirements constituting qualification as a legal newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statutes 331A.02, 331A.07 and other ap is lads, as amended. (B) � printed I r r)C—> which is attached, was cut from the columns Qf said newspaper, and was printed and published once each week for successive eks; it was .first blished on Friday, th( day of 2 x2003 and was thereafter printed and published on every Friday, to and including Friday, the___.._____ —.— day of , 2003; and printed below is a copy of the lower case alphabet from A to Z, both inclusive, which is hereby acknowledged as being the size and kind of type used in the composition and publication of the notice: abcdefghij khnnopyrstuvw xyz By: Sub 'bed and sw rn to before me on this ap day of 2003. Notary Public r. AFFIDAVIT =SMIT NOTA Com CITY OF ROSEMOUNT ,PT ICE OF .. UBLAC HEARING-,,- , Appeal of a Decision of the of Appeals and Adjustments to Approve'avARIANCE for a Fence Height NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council of the City of Rosemount will conduct a public hearing _'on Tuesday, January 6, 2004, in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 2875 145 Street West, Rosemount Minnesota. )w of ,or Persons wishing to speak on this - -issue are•invited to attend and be heard at this scheduled public hearm&g 6tmal writ -. ten comments will also be prior to the meeting dates. Please forward all written comments and/or inquiries to the, Planning Department. of, the City. of 'oseigount or caul (651) 322 -2051 - _ Datedthis 17tti day of December 2003. s/ Linda 7enti4 City Clerk' _ 'City o;1';Rosemormt;_ . Da kmw can Minnesota:- . Auxiliary aids and servicei are available Please contact; the City, Clerk at (651)322-2003, ' or. 7DDN. (651)423 6219jYO' make a request. F.znrnples 'of aurtliary aids or - • services., tnay i>�lnde •' sign lggg +!ngf` -- - - -- listening kit, accessible'meeting- location, etc: - `12J26/03 ' - uOtsstuTTUOD i3uTuuuld aTjl Xq pajuriO oouviJUn aoual aalp polllwgns OutmauQ :;Ei uoiloaS UOS310IN auXEm WOJJ u3 U3'j : I j uoTWS sonbour jon2 W uuoij uam-I ::0 T uOIT33S uOTTuTUUOJui azis 10Z drw aqs uoTlippV pj£ sIpH uo=gS :6 uOITOOS IOOZ `jZ uaquTa�das `ajoiIjv saftld umol 100E 18I aaquualdas 2uiTo3W uujni3aZl sfuTpaaooid fqTo Iunouu3so21 uuouj so nulW :8 uoilooS Xouuonu `a3joH IIOOS wOJJ uaUarl :L uOTloaS £OOZ u ,9 ni f TulpoW pounoD XIIJ aul aoj pa10 as suoTloas lt,uoii!ppv solou lluzuod / sassauppu / saumoTd aouaj junouuaso-d Bul sTxg :9 uotloas (IToddns jo sa31431 L) junouddu jo snuaj pooTjuogT 5pN (saun4uaTs SZ) suotlTiad pooTjuogTji?taN lioddns pooTjuogTli?iau i?uipnjoui `uoTluuuojuT dL 31!S pooTjuogTjiiTaN : S uoiloos palnooj aq pjnom lggls jo saurj pue oouaj pasodoid auaTjnn jo sa.Tnlot :V uoTloaS 2uiduospur -I adTS uax UIOJJ uaPaZ : E notPo S oouoj jo uujd pasodoud :Z uoT133S (saDnd Z) uoge:)ijddV aouPUUA : I u uoquaiiddV aauut.tuA aqua j q;im ui pauanj 9 g2noaq; i suotlaaS y . slualuo3 jo alqus, uoiluaiiddV aauui.auA Section 7: Letter from Scott Hoke, attorney C� I I J December 19, 2003 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Rosemount 2875 - 445t Street Rosemount MN 55068 Re: Stephen and Roxane Sipe 14292 Crofton Court Dear Mayor and Council: G. SCOTT HOKE PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION ' I represent Stephen and Roxane Sipe in regard to their variance request. I have reviewed a variety of materials regarding this request, and would like to comment. Incidentally, I have been a member of the City of Dayton Planning Commission for 11 years, so I am quite familiar with the political, practical, and legal implications ofthe request now under consideration, having handled such requests many times. It seems to me that the Sipe's request has been appealed not because of any legal considerations, but because this issue is a political one which one council member desires to address. That being the ' case, perhaps the solution is an ordinance amendment in the future, rather than penalizing the Sipes. I believe the variance request ought to be granted for the following reasons: r 1. The request has no adverse effect on the public health or welfare. In fact, a higher fence is appropriate for a swimming pool. Most municipalities require higher fences than is required by ' Rosemount. 2. Your Planning Commission approved the request. While not a binding recommendation, it should be remembered that planning commissions are in place and its members appointed to be the `expert' body in regards to land use and planning decisions. Deference should be given to the planning commission's recommendations and conclusions. 3. During the process of inquiring with the City about the plans to enhance their property my clients were at no time told that the request may not be granted, until many hours and dollars were spent on planning, performing improvements, and buying materials. City staff represented to the Sipes that all was well, until they received Mr. Lindahl's report issued just prior to the Planning Commission ' TELEPHONE: 763.712.3777 • FAX: 763.422.3838 • hokelaw @aol.com ATTORNEY AT LAW • 12201 CHAMPLIN DRIVE • CHAMPLIN, MINNESOTA 55316 City of Rosemount December 19, 2003 page 2 meeting of December 9, 2003. Thousands of dollars were spent in reliance on the staff representations. 4. Requests such as my clients' have been granted in the past, either expressly or implicitly. To now deny a request which mirrors that of many other improvements to homes in the City seems to me to be an arbitrary exercise of the City's powers. Since treating similar requests equally is appropriate, my clients' request ought to be granted just as other have been in the past. Approving the requests in the past has some precedential value in this case. Denying the present appeal and giving final approval to my clients' request is the correct result to reach in this matter. Dissatisfaction with ordinances which have created the need for the request should be dealt with in the future through amendments to the applicable ordinances, after careful study and public input. Please feel free to contact me if you wish to discuss this further U 3Ott Hoke Stephen and Roxane Sipe Section 8: Minutes from Rosemount City Proceeding Regular Meeting September 18, 2001 Town Pages article September 21, 2001 H I PUBLIC HEARINGS ROSEMOUNT CITY PROCEEDINGS REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 18, 2001 ' Mayor Busho explained the Public Hearing process for the audience. There will be opportunity for public comments following staff and applicant presentations. City Clerk Jentink reported that the affidavits for public notice and publication for all three hearings are on file. ' PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal of Board of Appeals Decision for Jacques Variance to Fence Height Requirement, 15130 Dartmoor Court Planning Intern Aaron Jones gave a presentation of the Planning Commission's denial for the fence height and encroachment of side yard on a corner lot for Jacques. The public hearing was held on ' August 14, 2001. Ordinance allows for a 42 inch high fence within this setback area. The variance denied hardship was shown. was since no Margaret Jacques, 15130 Dartmoor Court, showed photos of various fences in the near -by area with ' fences on corner lots. Most of them appeared to be within the side -yard setbacks. Jacques presented a drawing of her lot and several neighbors. This showed that her fence would be 97 feet from Dartmoor Trail with 30 MPH it would take about six car lengths to stop and this would be sufficient. ' Also, although six other homes have these privacy fences, no accidents have occurred, showing that safety has not been jeopardized. ' Council Member Klassen noted that the Planning Commission is the `gate - keeper" for the city rules and regulations. They are required to stick to policy. The City Council has the authority to deviate from these rules if justified. City Administrator Burt remarked that staff has all done their jobs ' correctly for this. Burt was concerned that many non - conforming fences could be legitimized with policy change. Mayor Busho requested that fences on corner lots be considered at a work session. The Public Hearing was opened for comments. Don Nelson, 15156 December Trail, said he is the nearest neighbor to Jacques and is in support of ' their privacy fence. Nelson noted that -so many neighbors have fences similar to their request that it would be unfair not to allow this. Marion Shaw, 15150 Dartmoor Path, supports Jacques fence request. Shaw was concerned about discrimination regarding application on the fence regulations. Shaw noted that privacy on a corner lot is desirable. ' MOTION by Edwards to close the Public Hearing for the Variance Appeal for Margaret Jacques, 15130 Dartmoor Court. Second by Klassen. Ayes: Five. Nays: None. Motion carried. ' MOTION by Edwards to reverse the decision of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments for the fence variance for Margaret Jacques, 15130 Dartmoor Court. Second by Klassen. Ayes: Edwards, Klassen, Busho, Riley. Nays: Cisewski. Motion carried. Council Member Cisewski explained that although she understood the Jacques desire for the privacy S C I I ROSEMOUNT CITY PROCEEDINGS REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 18, 2001 fence she could not vote against the ordinance established in good faith by past City Councils. Mayor Busho called for a five minute recess. The meeting was reconvened at 9:10 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING: Drainage & Utility Easement Vacation Lots 4 -7, Block 1 and Lots 2 -7, Block 2, Evermoor 3 rd Addition Interim City Engineer Weiss reported that this is a "housekeeping" item for Innisfree Development Plat. The easements were dedicated for public use and will not now be needed, so the land can be vacated for the individual lots. The Public Hearing was opened for comments. There were no comments. MOTION by Edwards to close the Public Hearing for Drainage & Utility Easement Vacation for Lots 4 -7, Block 1 and Lots 2 -7, Block 2, Evermoor 3rd Addition. Second by Riley. Ayes: Five. Nays: None. Motion carried. MOTION by Edwards to adopt A RESOLUTION CAUSING EASEMENT VACATION FOR ' LOTS 4 - 7, BLOCK 1 and LOTS 207, BLOCK 2 EVERMOOR 3 rd ADDITION. Second by Klassen. Ayes: Cisewski, Busho, Riley, Edwards, Klassen. Nays: None. Motion carried. ' PUBLIC HEARING: Drainage & Utility Easement Vacation Lot 1, Block 1, Broback Eighth Addition/Westhaven ' Interim City Engineer Weiss noted that the drainage and utility easements for Westhaven could be vacated because they will not be needed for public use. Lot 1, Block 1, will be replatted. Six new lots are created in the Addition. ' The Public Hearing was opened for comments. There were no comments. ' MOTION by Edwards to close the Public Hearing for Drainage and Utility Easement Vacation, Lot 1, Block 1, Broback Eighth Addition. Second by Cisewski. Ayes: Five. Nays: None. Motion carried. ' MOTION by Edwards to adopt A RESOLUTION CAUSING EASEMENT VACATION FOR THE WEST 10.00 FEET AND THE NORTH 10.00 FEET OF LOT 1, BLOCK 1, BROBACK EIGHT ADDITION. Second by Riley. Ayes: Riley, Edwards, Klassen, Cisewski, Busho. Nays: ' None. Motion carried. Biscayne Pointe Fourth Addition Concept PUD Review ' City Planner Pearson reviewed the request by Thomas Von Bische of Heritage Development who has been working with staff and the Planning Commission to design a single - family development of about 68 lots. Sewer and water will be available due to the placement of St. Joseph's Catholic 1 5 Page 2 September 21 2001 ROSEMOUNT TOWN PACES By MATTHEW PERENCHio ty easements in Evermoor — -high fences in this area. stratioh of maps, pictures and needed to stay true to when she had no formal public comment. Jacques said she wanted the speech moved the council. took office. Staff writer The other hearing was for fence for privacy and for her "I have to sav this is one of In other business, the Margaret Jacques, who was children's safety because of the most compelling presents- Council approved the installs- seeking a reversal for a vari- increased traffic along tions I have ever seen," said tion of traffic signs and a speed After a moment of silence for ance denied by the board of December Trail. Council Member Sheila limit reduction. School zone the victims of the attacks on the appeals and adjustments. On "Things are very different Klassen: "(Jacques) did the signs will be placed on the United States, the Rosemount Aug. 14, . the Planning from when we moved in to our research and took the neces- north and south ends of City Council meeting got under Commission, based on visibility home," she said. "It's very busy sary steps." _ Shannon Park Elementary, and way Tuesday night. concerns, had declined to allow now and there is a lot more The Council approved the speed limit on Shannon While not many major issues Jacques to build a 6 -foot high noise. I feel this is necessary." Jacques' request 4 -1. Council Parkway — from Connemara were discussed, the meeting fence in a 30 -foot street -side Along with the two nearest member Ena Cisewski said that Trail to 300 feet north of had three open hearings, two of : setback area for corner lots; the property owners who support- while she backed Jacques, her Evermoor Parkway — will be which — for drainage and utili- ordinance only allows 42 -inch ed the request, Jacques' demon - personal stance on such issues reduced from 35 mph to 30 mph when children are present. Members present: Mapr Cathy Busho and council m� hers Sheila Klassen, I-_nq Cisewski, Mary Riley and Jshh Edwards. Members absent: none. The next meeting of Rosemount City Council scheduled for 7:30 p.m. Tuesday, Oct. 2. M M M r= M M = == M= M M Section 9: Shannon Hills 3 rd Addition site map Lot Size Information and Statistics I " DoT ,5)Zf, SITE MAP ��r�� .� --�� 11 r, 1p is 4 81 ------ , l%r [3997 I 14293 + 7,31 E: Ditnenaorts rounded to nearest kicL -rtutd 2003. Davao CmxtY - d I. , . wgany recorded ump n a mzv" and is not intended In be used as am && m a cm qxWbm & records. k&xmmbm oral data bcood in vwkm cilY. COUrft and Purposes 2003 ESTIMATED MARKET VALUES (PAYABLE 2004) LAND: 49,500 LOT SIZEE (EXCLUDES BUILDING 185,600 ROAD EASEMENTS) TOTAL 235.100 14.190 SO FT SCHOOL DISTRICT 196 0.33 ACRES LOCATION SW114 NE114 SECTION 311-11519 PAYABLE 2004 HOMESTEAD STATUS* FULL HOMESTEAD WATERSHED DISTRICT: VERMILLION RIVER LAST QUALIFIED SALE: DATE: 1011993 AMOUNT: 137,117 2003 BUILDING INFORMATION (PAYABLE 2004) TYPE S.FANtRES )PERTY ID NUMBER: 3487427-030-01 OWNER: STEPHEN A & ROXANE R SIPE 14292 CROFTON CT FOUNDATION SO FT 1365 RGSFMOUNTMN55MO )PERTY ADDRESS: 14292 CROFTON CT 3 ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 ABLE 2003 TAXES FRAME TAX. 2.581.02 CIAL ASSESSMENTS: 0.00 AL TAX & SA: ABLE 2004 ASMNT ,, 2,581,02 USAGERESIDENTIAL MISC BLDG 11 r, 1p is 4 81 ------ , l%r [3997 I 14293 + 7,31 E: Ditnenaorts rounded to nearest kicL -rtutd 2003. Davao CmxtY - d I. , . wgany recorded ump n a mzv" and is not intended In be used as am && m a cm qxWbm & records. k&xmmbm oral data bcood in vwkm cilY. COUrft and Purposes 2003 ESTIMATED MARKET VALUES (PAYABLE 2004) LAND: 49,500 LOT SIZEE (EXCLUDES BUILDING 185,600 ROAD EASEMENTS) TOTAL 235.100 14.190 SO FT SCHOOL DISTRICT 196 0.33 ACRES LOCATION SW114 NE114 SECTION 311-11519 PAYABLE 2004 HOMESTEAD STATUS* FULL HOMESTEAD WATERSHED DISTRICT: VERMILLION RIVER LAST QUALIFIED SALE: DATE: 1011993 AMOUNT: 137,117 2003 BUILDING INFORMATION (PAYABLE 2004) TYPE S.FANtRES YEAR BUILT 1993 ARCHISTYLE SPLIT LEVL FOUNDATION SO FT 1365 FINIISHED SO FT 2353 BEDROOMS 3 BATHS 2.75 FRAME V400D GARAGE SO FT 712 OTHER GARAGE MISC BLDG 142P 13 -752- 14 100 I �0 q ) ?—� � 381 LA V--t &A A �. V y, �o LCD 5 1 3 0 7 Tc4 ed sc�, c, 1 1 V\ i CU , i , A - lJ0 ' rTl 4" 1 ,e Ve- V1 0 C:r4 Cam'' � C , V" Pa, f�cf 4 0LA-) ;NA;.&Ck V C, I Lot SITE MAP �v- 30 ,)PERTY ID NUMBER: 34. 67427 -030 -01 OWNER STEPHEN A 8 ROXANE R SIPE 1993 14292 CROFTON CT SPLIT LEVL FOUNDATION SO FT 1365 ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 -7116 2353 �)PERTY ADDRESS: 14292 CROFTON CT BATHS 2.75 ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 ABLE 2003 TAXES GARAGE SQ FT TAX: 2,581.02 CIAL ASSESSMENTS. 0.00 - AL TAX 8 SA 2,58102 ABLE 2004 ASMNT USAGE: RESIDENTIAL L 1 1 L 11 J 2003 ESTIMATED MARKET VALUES (PAYABLE 2004) LAND: 49,500 LOT SIZE (EXCLUDES BUILDING: 185,600 ROAD EASEMENTS) TOTAL: 235,100 - 14,190 SO FT SCHOOL DISTRICT: 196 0.33 ACRES LOCATION: SW1 /4 NEt /4 SECTION 30- 115 -19 PAYABLE 2004 HOMESTEAD STATUS: FULL HOMESTEAD WATERSHED DISTRICT: VERMILLION RIVER LAST QUALIFIED SALE: DATE: 10/1993 AMOUNT: 137,117 E: Dimensions rounded to nearest foot. right 2003, Dakota County - drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. drawing is a compilation of records, information and data located In various city, county, and Offices and other sources. affecting the area shown, and is to be used for reference Purposes 2003 BUILDING INFORMATION (PAYABLE 2004) TYPE S.FAM.RES YEAR BUILT 1993 ARCH/STYLE SPLIT LEVL FOUNDATION SO FT 1365 FINISHED SO FT 2353 BEDROOMS 3 BATHS 2.75 FRAME WOOD GARAGE SQ FT 712 OTHER GARAGE MISC BLDG PLAT NAME: SHANNON HILLS 3RD ADD TAX DESCRIPTION:. 3 1 42 %8 142 'k . 1 3874 .l.l nan aWv 3vwh! Ifx e 4 K n rxnc Qyy rFOI iY707 � �r f .�.,r� . arf s�.�lr r� see tnw A�b�1►"� 1' J9M�7 � ' a /"r � \ J � .a.ft.� � f � , ,1rV+yJ�.YK?rC� OIL 't Al ' �w '1 r - -�i I + I 1 ^ __ ��T - - - - - I \ 1 1' 1 1 X,XK 1. R , \ � I l fT. - I � I• M �J _ -_- ' i p = •fix\ ` ; ' \ y� t -'';t. r t r -- - -- --- __ ' (• �- i � I - _��1 r_Gy - - � e•- _Y•� -- � r- -ii.�l - i I 1 r .•+• s \ \ �.. , L' � L ' ' � I�LtI � � ' � I `� � 2 i IC 1 = A }� = f t, � � t *' • ' l \ i\�} � `` � � a `�' l • r-- - -7I`yy --- - � �� ' 7E!`li i�'! I •� ' '� 1 > r O ,` Q Zi '_' � 3i i I I i + ' � � � �Y � !' - r., -;ri+� L 4 - •'F��- yp �> > ! + r � ti� `- 1 _ � ---- i I - scJefrJl'r -- j 1. _ _ . /'`i `'--'1 r J i �ti<��✓�„ ' �� te . a I �� + . r � Ft` �. � _ M T I v i O - GX NONMVHS E Section 10: Letter from Margaret Jacques 1 1 January 5, 2004 Dear Mr. Mayor & City Council Members, 1 I am writing to ask that you grant the Sipe's variance for a 6' fence. We were also in this exact same position Sept. 18, 2001. Mayor Buscho and the City Council members very 1 enthusiastically and almost unanimously granted us our variance. I had pointed out six other fences in our neighborhood that had 5' & 6' privacy fences on the same corner lot set -up as ours as well as the Sipe's. They were issued permits in error. The Sipe's should be able to use their yard in the same manner. Most importantly, their fence would not pose a traffic visibility problem, and their rear neighbor has no objections. Please do what is fair and grant them their variance. Sincerely, Margaret Jacq es 1 15130 Dartmoor Ct 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Section 11: Letter from - Wayne Nickson To: City Council Rosemount, MN ' January 2, 2004 ' To Whom It May Concern: I understand that a variance that was granted to Roxane and Steve Sipe on December 9, ' 2003 has been appealed by Mary Riley of the City Council. I believe that the variance should be upheld and that the appeal be dropped. ' I live on the same cul -de sac as the Sipe family. My house is directly across the street from the Sipe family. I was granted a fence variance on October 26, 1993 at the Planning Commission meeting. The variance allowed the construction of a six -foot high fence on ' the street side yard along 143` Street and 14292 Crofton Court. At the Planning Commission meeting, I was told that I could build a six -foot chain link ' fence. I was told that the fence needed to be chain link because the commission thought that I would not keep a wood fence maintained. Therefore, I was informed that my fence would have to be maintenance free. My original plan was to have Dakota Fence install a ' six -foot wood fence with a scalloped decorative border. In hindsight, I wish that I had installed a wood fence. I do not think it was fair of the City Planning Commission to assume that I would not keep a wood fence maintained. A wood fence would enhance the neighborhood more that a chain link fence. ' Thank you for you time and consideration. Sincerely, ' Wayne Nickson 14293 Crofton Court Rosemount, MN 55068 h n II I Section 12: Drawing submitted after fence variance granted by the Planning Commission I �n( v IK